Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Phytoremediation Potential of Selected G
Phytoremediation Potential of Selected G
2017
1
Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Science and Technology of
Southern Philippines, Cagayan de Oro, Philippines
Article published on November 30, 2017
Key words: Phytoremediation, Absorptive capacity, Mercury, Plant species, Tailing pond
Abstract
Generally, the study aims to investigate the absorptive capacity of the three dominant grass species namely
Imperata cylindrica L. (Cogon grass), Megathyrsus maximus J. (Guinea grass), and Pennisetum purpureum S.
(Napier grass) in remediating mercury contamination from a mining tailing pond of barangay Gango, Libona
Bukidnon, Philippines. It also assessed the level of mercury contamination in the soil within the study area. The
study made used of a descriptive comparative method and One-way Analysis of Variance for the statistical tool.
Composite samplings were made for the soil samples and the presence of mercury in both the grass and soil
samples were analyzed using a Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (CVAAS). Based on the findings of
the study, the three grass species showed absorptive capacity and were able to remediate mercury from the soil.
The highest mercury uptake was cogon grass with an average concentration of 10.473 ppm followed by guinea
grass with an average of 7.521 ppm then napier grass with an average of 3.012 ppm. It also showed that the soil
sample without vegetation has greater concentration of mercury than the soil sample with vegetation.
*Corresponding Gina C. Lacang gclacang@ustp.edu.ph
The study area is in Gango, Libona Bukidnon where approximately 8,000 square meters. Based on interview
small scale mining area is shown in the map (see Fig. 2). from the locals the possible passage way of the overflow
The tailing pond (see Fig. 3) has a total area of water coming from the tailing pond is in Bigaan River.
Fig. 2. Map of Gango, Libona, Bukidnon showing Gango Small Mining Area.
Fig. 3. Showing sampling point of each grass species in the tailing pond.
Fig. 4. Dominant Grass Species in Gango Tailing Pond a.) cogon grass b.) napier grass c.) guinea grass.
Entry protocol was observed prior to ocular tape with a marking point in the plastic straw string
inspection. During ocular inspection in the study as an indication of how far is every sample from one
area, dominant grass species were seen present another. After pointing each sampling point with the
within the perimeter of the tailing pond. These three labeled straw, the researcher removed the straw in the
grass species were identified by an expert as cogon sampling area and measured the distance of each
grass, napier grass and guinea grass (see). grass sampling point with the use of transect line.
Collection of Grass Species The grass with their roots including the soil were dug
The researchers collected three samples of selected and being cut using a large single- edged knife known
dominant grass species that grows abundantly around as “bolo” and the soil from the roots are separated
the tailing pond through a composite sampling which serves as the soil sample with vegetation. Only
method. In plotting and measuring the distance of matured grass roots of the three dominant grass
every grass samples, plastic straw string was used. species were taken, while the upper portion of the
Every sampling point was labeled using a masking grass has been discarded (see Fig. 5).
Fig. 5. Grass roots collected from the mine tailing pond area.
Collection of Soil Sample & Preparation placed inside a plastic container for laboratory
Composite sampling method were used in the preparation and digestion. Soil samples attached at
collection of soil samples. Three sampling points were the roots of the three dominant grass species were
identified from the center of the tailing pond where also collected, placed inside a zip –locked plastic
soil sample without vegetation was collected. Equal container and brought to the lab for mercury content
amount of soil sample, about 200 grams were taken analysis for the sample on soil with vegetation. These
from each sampling site, mixed and homogenized by soil samples, along with the plant roots of about 50
removing small stones and other materials which are grams per plant species (see Fig. 6) were analyzed for
not part of the soil. From the mixed soil sample, three mercury content using a cold vapor atomic absorption
subsamples of about 100 grams each (see Fig. 6) were spectroscopy (CVAAS).
The Fig. 6 below shows the schematic diagram on the preparation of sample for mercury content analysis.
significant differences of the absorptive capacity of stannous chloride to reduce mercury (II) ion to
mercury.
the three different grass species.
absorption of 7.521ppm and with the Napier grass grass was able to absorb heavy metal to all parts of
(Pennisetum purpureum S.) that showed to have the the plants which are the roots, stem and shoots. Base
lowest uptake of 3.012ppm. The common reason why on the study of Marrugo et al. (2014), the longer the
they are different on its total absorption of mercury exposure of the plant species to the heavy metal
uptake can be explained on its different contaminated area, the higher is its cumulative
characteristics of its root morphology. Cogon grass
absorption. Fig. 7 shows the mean average of mercury
has a deep rooted roots, guinea grass has short root
(Hg) uptake in the three different grass species
creeping rhizome (Cook et al., 2005) and napier grass
namely; Imperata cylindrica L. (Cogon grass),
has a vigorous root system (DAFF, 2014). Base on the
Megathyrsus maximus J. (Guinea grass) and
study of Chunilall, et al. (2004), mercury is mostly
Pennisetum purpureum S. (Napier grass).
absorbed in the root system of the plant.
Table 2. One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of Mercury (Hg) root uptakes of three grass species.
Source of SS df MS F P-value F crit
Variation
Between Groups 84.7257908 2 42.3628954 4.5516705 *0.062 5.1432
Within Groups 55.84265 6 9.30710933
Total 140.568446 8
Heaton AC, Rugh CL, Wang NJ, Meagher RB. Paz-Alberto AM, et. al. 2007. “Phytoextraction of
1998. Phytoremediation of mercury-and Lead-Contaminated Soil Using Vetiver grass (Vetiveria
methylmercury-polluted soils using genetically zizanioides L.), Cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica L.)
engineered plants. Journal of Soil Contamination and Carabao grass (Paspalum conjugatum L.),”
7(4), 497-509. Environmental Science and Pol- lution Research, Vol.
14, No. 7, pp. 498-504. doi:10.1065/espr2007.05.415
Henry JR. 2000. An overview of the
phytoremediation of lead and mercury (pp. p3-9). Raskin I, Ensley BD. 2000. Phytoremediation of
Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Toxic Metals: Using Plants to Clean Up the
Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Environment. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Response, Technology Innovation Office.
Table 1. The table below shows the total absorption
Ma C, Ming H, Lin C, Naidu R, Bolan N. 2016. of mercury uptake in roots using a Cold Vapor AAS as
Phytoextraction of heavy metal from tailing waste shown in.
using Napier grass. Catena 136, 74-83.
Vidali M. 2001. Bioremediation. An overview. Pure
Marrugo-Negrete J, Durango-Hernández J, and Applied Chemistry 73(7), 1163-1172.
Pinedo-Hernández J, Olivero-Verbel J, Díez S.
2015. Phytoremediation of mercury-contaminated
soils by Jatropha curcas. Chemosphere 127, 58-63.